Peer Review Policy

AJET is dedicated to maintaining high standards of scholarly publishing through an impartial, transparent, and rigorous peer review system. Every manuscript submitted to the journal is assessed to ensure its academic quality, originality, methodological soundness, and relevance before publication.

The journal follows a double-blind peer review model in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process. This approach promotes objective evaluation and minimizes potential bias. Manuscripts submitted to AJET are assessed according to the following procedures.

Initial Editorial Assessment

  • Every submission is reviewed by the Editorial Board to determine whether it is suitable for consideration.
  • Manuscripts are examined for compliance with the journal's submission requirements, scope, formatting standards, and publication ethics.
  • All submissions are screened for textual similarity using Turnitin before entering the peer review process.

Selection of Reviewers

  • The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Associate Editor appoints a minimum of two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript.
  • Reviewers are selected on the basis of their academic qualifications, research experience, publication record, and the absence of any conflict of interest.

Conflict of Interest

AJET expects authors, reviewers, and editors to disclose any financial, institutional, professional, or personal relationships that could influence the editorial or review process.

  • Authors must provide a conflict of interest declaration when submitting their manuscript.
  • Reviewers should decline invitations if they have any conflict that may affect their impartiality.
  • Editors must withdraw from handling manuscripts whenever a conflict of interest exists.

All disclosed information is handled confidentially and is used solely to ensure fairness and transparency during the editorial process.

Peer Review

Reviewers evaluate each manuscript with particular attention to:

  • Originality and contribution of the research.
  • Scientific quality and methodological validity.
  • Accuracy of data analysis and interpretation.
  • Organization, clarity, and quality of presentation.
  • Relevance to the journal's scope.
  • Compliance with ethical standards.

Based on their assessment, reviewers may recommend one of the following decisions:

  • Accept without revision.
  • Accept with minor revisions.
  • Accept with major revisions.
  • Revise and resubmit.
  • Reject.

Editorial Decision

  • The final publication decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief after considering the reviewers' reports and the overall quality of the manuscript.
  • Authors receive the editorial decision together with the reviewers' comments and any required revisions.

Revision Process

  • Authors are expected to revise their manuscript within the timeframe specified by the editorial office.
  • Revised submissions may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by the Editorial Board to confirm that the reviewers' comments have been satisfactorily addressed.

Acceptance and Publication

  • A manuscript is formally accepted once it has fulfilled all editorial and peer review requirements.
  • Accepted manuscripts proceed through copyediting, typesetting, proofreading, and final quality checks before publication.